Nevada AG says lawsuit is about the rule of law, not immigration

By Amber Phillips

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2015 | 10:32 a.m.

WASHINGTON — Appearing before Congress, Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt elaborated on his controversial decision to join a lawsuit against President Barack Obama’s immigration actions, telling lawmakers it’s a matter of defending the rule of law.

“This suit is not about immigration,” Laxalt told members of the House Judiciary Committee today. “It is not about politics. It is about the rule of law and our constitutional system.”

House Republicans invited the recently elected Republican lawyer to speak on behalf of the 26 states suing Obama for granting deportation relief for millions of undocumented immigrants.

The hearing, titled “The Unconstitutionality of Obama’s Executive Actions on Immigration,” mostly served as an opportunity for Republicans to air their grievances about those actions on the eve of a potential shutdown for the agency that carries them out.

Laxalt was joined by law experts from Texas and Florida questioning the legality of the president’s actions. House Democrats had one witness defending the actions.

Laxalt stated his belief that Obama overstepped his legal bounds by changing the law without the consent of Congress. It’s a slippery slope for future presidents, Laxalt warned.

“Our Constitution is eroding, and the executive branch continues to take more and more power,” he said.

House Democrats saw the president’s authority in the matter much differently.

Obama has changed federal policy — not the law — which is well within his power, said Washington University in St. Louis law professor Stephen Legomsky. Legomsky cited 135 immigration scholars who have signed on to a letter declaring Obama’s actions constitutional and not unprecedented.

“There’s no law out there that says the president couldn’t grant deferred action,” Legomsky said, adding that past presidents of both parties have granted deportation relief to immigrants.

The lawsuit’s supporters were dealt a victory last week when a Texas federal judge temporarily halted the president’s executive actions on procedural grounds. The Obama administration has requested a stay of the ruling.

Laxalt brought Nevada into the Texas-led lawsuit last month, representing the 26th state to legally challenge Obama’s deal. He joined the suit without the support of Gov. Brian Sandoval. Laxalt’s and Sandoval’s own Republican Party was split, with some backing Laxalt and others arguing that litigation was not the right way to challenge the president’s deal.

Sen. Dean Heller is one of those Nevada Republicans who has expressed frustration with the lawsuit, saying it distracts from passing comprehensive immigration reform. On Tuesday as Laxalt arrived in Washington, Heller said Laxalt was entitled to his opinions, but he wished the attorney general would have conferred with Sandoval before joining the suit.

“I wish there would have been a broader consensus on the direction he wanted to go,” Heller said. “And having a face-to-face with the governor would have gone a long way.”

Heller said he was not concerned Laxalt’s spotlight in Washington could undermine Nevada Republicans’ attempts to make inroads with Latino voters.

“I think the community recognizes the difference between myself and the attorney general,” Heller said.

At the hearing, Laxalt stressed he’s an independently elected official and said the split between him and Sandoval is “much ado about nothing.”

As CQ Roll Call columnist David Hawkings noted, House Republicans’ choice of Laxalt to represent the multi-state lawsuit is a testament to Laxalt’s political pedigree — and potential political ambitions.

A few Nevada politicos stopped by to watch Laxalt’s Washington debut. In the audience were Republican lieutenant governor candidate Sue Lowden, Assistant Attorney General Wesley Duncan and Mendy Elliott, a former top aide for Gov. Jim Gibbons.

Las Vegas Sun reporter Ana Ley contributed to this report.